Here’s the text of the agreement described in reports in the NY Times and elsewhere today. It’s the most significant institutional response to the massive loss of life (now above a thousand dead) in the April Bangladesh factory collapse.

This may be a signal episode in the continuing evolution of global corporate regulation. Formally styled as the “Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh,” the agreement is being executed by trade unions and corporations. It establishes a standing Steering Committee (three seats for unions and corporations each, one for a designee of the International Labour Organization) to police the agreement, which requires companies to undertake the inspection of Bangladesh supplier facilities and remediation as necessary. It also sets up a worker complaint mechanism, with binding arbitration under the New York Convention. NGOs appear to have some participatory standing as “witnesses” to the agreement.

H&M, Tesco, C&A, and Calvin Klein, among others, are on board. There is a midnight May 15 deadline – countdown and latest developments can be found at the UNI Global Union site. There has to be a lot of pressure on the big apparel manufacturers to sign on.

The template: a legal agreement between non-state parties facilitated and nominally hosted by an international organization. No governments involved, at least not as parties to the agreement. If it works, look for more of the same in other contexts. The ILO ‘s profile will surely rise in the face of this episode and the growing global awareness of worker rights issues.

2 Responses

This is curious that this is concluded so quickly after such a horrendous disaster. How much of this is public relations and how much is meaningful reform? If the corporations were not willing to assure quality before, why would they be willing to do so now?
Best,
Ben

5.14.2013
at 5:24 pm EST Benjmain Davis

In fact you can track the very origins of the accord proposal back to the year 2011. However, the newest appraoch was launched in November 2012, and negotiations were on progress. Due to the collapse of the the building at Rana Plaza got a significant rush, however since some essential detailes have still to be clearified the whole legal binding issue is quite tricky.

5.15.2013
at 4:49 am EST John Woodman

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

There are no trackbacks or pingbacks associated with this post at this time.

March 24, 2015Responding to Rogier Bartels About Perfidy at Just Security
My friend Rogier Bartels published two excellent posts at Just Security over the past few days (here and here) in which he argues that it is inherently perfidious to launch an attack from a military object disguised as a civilian object. Just Secur...